Message-ID:	<386ADF86.3B03E29F@caresystems.com.au>
Date:	Thu, 30 Dec 1999 14:28:54 +1000
From:	leon <Leon AT caresystems DOT com DOT au>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language:	en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Why did ID choose DJGPP for Quake?
References:	<B0000025649 AT nordhorn DOT de> <84dem1$b2a$1 AT news02 DOT btx DOT dtag DOT de> <LUwa4.3016$wd2 DOT 66117 AT dfiatx1-snr1 DOT gtei DOT net> <84e9ll$gku$1 AT news02 DOT btx DOT dtag DOT de>
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Vinzent Hoefler wrote:

> >> For me the "real" GPL looks more strict than the license of a
> >> commercial compiler: It requires you to release the source
> >> with your programs.
> >
> >Which is why some of us hate Cygwin.
>

am sorry - i am rather new to this "thread" - but the general question
from me would be:

if you use GNU (ie gcc compiler) - for example like djgpp or mingw32 -
then do you have to make source code available - or is there any monetary
issues - ie paying for use?

If so  - how does that stack up against _not_ compiling the final product
with those compilers but still _developing_ code (eg debugging, and even
earlier stage - coding of you project). Then what if one simply says - ok
now my product is working - what if one then goes and buys commercial
version and compiles  the final product that was developed with other
tools - would one still have to pay to djgpp/mingw32/cygwin (for using
those in development stage)?

- Raw text -